IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

IEEJ © Apr. 20191

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

Contents2

１．Key points of the current energy mix toward2030 based on the 4th Basic Energy Plan
２．Key points of the 5th Basic Energy Plan
３．Possible Cooperation in North East Asia

IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

3

１．Key points of the current energy mix based on the 4th Basic Energy Plan

(1) The premise of the energy mix for 2030

❖ The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) released the Long-term Energy
Supply and Demand Outlook ( namely Energy Mix for 2030 ) based on the 4th Basic Energy
Plan in July 2015.
❖ The Premise is;1) The energy self-sufficiency rate should be realized at the level before
the March 2011 disaster (to around 25%).
2) Electricity costs should be lowered from the present level.
3) The greenhouse gas emission reduction target should be comparable toEuropean and U.S. targets, leading the world.
⇒ At the same time, the dependence on nuclear power generation
should be lowered as much as possible.

IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

4

Reference

Promotion of Energy Conservation：Improvement of Ambitious Energy Efficiency❖ The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) promulgated "the Long-term Energy Supply
and Demand Outlook" in July 2015.
 Thorough energy conservation measures would reduce final energy consumption by 13% to 326 million kl.
 Energy conservation measures would be accumulated to improve energy efficiency as much as just after
the oil crises.

Further energy conservation (3 points)① “Facility Renovation”② “IT Utilization”• FEMS （ Factory Energy Management System ）• BEMS （ Building〃）• HEMS （ Home
〃
）
• ITS
（ Intelligent Transport Systems ）③ “Energy Conservation in Buildings”(Source) METI, ANRE “Long-term Energy Supply/Demand Outlook, Related Documents”
the Long-term Energy Supply and Demand Outlook Subcommittee, Strategic Policy
Committee, Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy, (11th meeting)Document 3, p.66 (July 16, 2015)
IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

5

Reference

2030 Energy Supply and Demand Structure: Difference Between 2010 and 2015 Versions＜1＞Energy Demand and Primary Energy Supply Structure (Energy Supply) Nuclear and renewable energy had a combined share of aprx. 40% (37%) in the2010 version of the target energy for 2030, against 24.3% in the 2015 version. The nuclear share in
the 2015 version was halved from the 2010 version. Priority shifted from heavy dependence on
nuclear energy to diversification.
① Economic Growth

2010（2007→2020）aprx. 2%/year

2015（2013→2030）② Energy Conservation

N.A.

（2020→2030）aprx. 1.2%/yearVer.

1.7%/yearVer.

③ Energy Self-Sufficiency
Ratio

aprx. 40%（37%）

730 mil. t-CO2)

24.3％(Down 25% from FY2013)

Improving EE by 35% in

20 years (same as the level
after “oil crisis”)（Energy Demand）（Projections in 2015）

361 mil. kl
Electricity
25%
Heat,
Gasoline,
City gas,
etc.:
75%

FY2013 (Actual)

Maximum EE
Improvement
aprx.
50.3 mil. kl
Economic(▲13%
from a case
Growth
without
EE measures)
1.7%/year
Electricity
28%
Heat,
326 mil. kl Gasoline,
City gas,
etc.:
72%
Final Energy
Demandaprx.

FY2030 (with EE)
N.B: EE stands for“Energy Efficiency”

IEEJ © Apr. 2019

Million kL
800
Oil Equivalent
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

④Energy-related
CO2 Emissions

927 mil. t-CO2)（Primary Energy Supply）
Comparing Projections 2010, 2015

517
13%
24%
17%
16%

489

Self
Sufficiency

13～ 14%11～ 10%
19%
25%

37％

Self
Sufficiency
aprx.

24.3％

3%

3%

27%

30%

(Projections in 2010)(Projections in 2015)

Renewable
Nuclear
Gas
Coal
LPG
Oil

Projections for 2030
(Source)（Projections in 2010）Joint Meeting, (The 2nd) Coordination Subcommittee, (The 4th) Basic Energy
Planning Subcommittee, Advisory Committee for Agency for Natural Resources
and Energy "Energy Supply and Demand Outlook in 2030“ (June, 2010)（Projections in 2015）METI “Long-term Energy Supply/Demand Outlook” (July 16, 2015)

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

6

Reference

2030 Energy Supply and Demand Structure: Difference Between 2010 and 2015 Versions＜2＞Electricity Mix

 (Electricity Mix) Nuclear and renewable energy had a combined share of 68% in the 2010 version
against 44% in the 2015 version. Nuclear energy’s share was cut by 30% (from 49％ to 20-22％).
Priority shifted from heavy dependence on nuclear energy to diversification.
①Energy Conservation2010 Ver.
2015 Ver.

② Nuclear Energy’s Share

N.A.

③Renewable Energy’s
Share

aprx. 50% (49%)

aprx. 20% (19%)

N.A.

20-22%

22-24%

Down 2-5% from FY2013

Total power generation

17%（2015 version）

Thorough energy conservation and maximum renewable energy expansion is set to cover aprx. 40%
of total electricity generation, with nuclear energy’s share of the electricity mix reduced substantially(from 29% before the March 2011 disaster to 20-22%).
Base load share: 56% (against 63% before the March 2011 disaster)（Electricity Demand）

Economic
growth:1.7% per year

Maximum EE
Improvement
aprx. 196.1 billion kWh(▲17% from a casewithout EE measures)

Renewableenergycovering

Electricity

billion kWhbillion kWh aprx. 40%

980.8

aprx. 19-20%
Nuclear:IEEJ © Apr. 2019

FY2030(with EE)

aprx. 1.0-1.1%

Biomass: aprx. 3.7-4.6%
Wind: aprx. 1.7%

aprx. 22-24% Solar PV: aprx. 7%
Nuclear:Hydro:

aprx. 17-18%
LNG:

aprx. 20-22% aprx. 8.8-9.2%
LNG:

Coal:

Coal:

Oil: aprx. 2%

Oil: aprx. 3%

aprx. 22%
aprx. 22%

FY2013 (Actual)

Geothermal :Renewableenergy:aprx. 27%
aprx. 26%

Projections
for FY2030

100 million kWh

12000

8000

1,065

billion kWh

Energyconservation:(Electricity mix)
Comparing Projections 2010, 2015

10000

(Total Electricity Output)

aprx. 17%
Energyconservation Renewableenergy:andElectricity

966.6（Electricity mix）
aprx. 1,278
billion kWh④ Electricity Cost

6000

14%

10200

10650

19%

22～ 24%

49%

4000
2000
0

14%
14%
4%

68％

22～ 20%

Renewable, etc
44％

27%
26%
3%

Nuclear
LNG
Coal
Oil, etc(Projections in 2010) (Projections in 2015)
Projections for
Projections
for2030
2030(Source)（Projections in 2010）Joint Meeting, (The 2nd) Coordination Subcommittee, (The 4th) Basic Energy
Planning Subcommittee, Advisory Committee for Agency for Natural Resources
and Energy "Energy Supply and Demand Outlook in 2030“ (June, 2010)（Projections in 2015）METI “Long-term Energy Supply/Demand Outlook” (July 16, 2015)

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

7

１．Key points of the current energy mix based on the 4th Basic Energy Plan

(2) How much we could achieve the current energy mix ?
Current status of three numerical targets upon energy mix decision⇒ Slow but steady progress① Improving energy self-sufficiency rate
Target*1: 6％ in FY2014 ⇒ 24.3% in FY2030
Current*2 :12.3% at FY2019-end ( IEEJ outlook ) --- half achieved② Electricity costs ( Fuel cost ＋ FIT purchase cost ＋ grid stabilization cost )Target *1: Reducing costs by FY2030 ( down 2-5% from FY2013 )Current *2

9.7 trillion yen in FY2013 (0.5 trillion yen in FIT purchase cost and 9.2 trillion yen in fueland other costs): 7.5 trillion yen in FY2019 ( IEEJ outlook )Down 22.7% from FY2013 --- well achieved, but when oil price goes up?
(2.3 trillion yen in FIT purchase cost and 5.3 trillion yen in fuel*3 and other costs)*3 Assumptions for the end of FY2019

Crude oil price 67 $/bbl ( CIF national average )③ Reducing energy-related CO2 emissions
Target *1: Reducing emissions in FY2030 by 21.9% from FY2013
Current *2:

Down 13.5% in FY2019 ( IEEJ outlook ) --- 60% achieved(Sources)

IEEJ © Apr. 2019

*1 METI, “Long-term Energy Supply and Demand Outlook (July 2015),” published on July 16, 2015;*2 IEEJ, “Economic and Energy Outlook of Japan through FY2019,” 431st Forum on Research Works on Dec. 21, 2018

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

8

Reference

Renewable energy’s lopsided development and high costs
Feed-in Tariff (FIT) development

60

40

40

20

20

0

0
7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11

7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11 3 7 11 3 7 112012 20132012 2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

 Consumer burden related to renewable electricity generation is soaring.

Solar PV Biomass
for nonresidenceWind Solar PV
forOperating60

Authorized

80

Operating80

Authorized

100

Operating100

Solar PV for residence
Solar PV for non-residenceWind
Biomass
Geothermal
Small/Medium-scale Hydro

The revocation of certification capacity andprospective non-operating capacity( estimated )Authorized

120

Operating120

AuthorizedGW

JPY trillion

Operating

GW【Installed Capacity】

Authorized【Authorized capacity】

Japan's total FIT surcharge

Others(Biomass,

residence Geothermal,

Small/Medium-scale Hydro) The rapid increase in solar power with high purchase price is greatly increasing the burden. The total consumer burden for

the next 20 years will reach 63 trillion yen by operating just the 89.8 GW capacity installed and licensed as of the end of
December 2018. This inevitable burden is equivalent to a 3.7 yen/kWh rise in tariffs, or 22% for industrial and 16% forresidential sectors.

 However, excluding the revocation of certification capacity and the biomass capacity recognized as difficult to realize frombarriers concerning long-term stable fuel procurement, the cumulative total amount is 51 trillion yen.
This inevitable burden is equivalent to a 3.0 yen/kWh rise in tariffs, or 18% for industrial and 13% for residential sectors.
Source: Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, “Status of Introduction of Renewable Electricity
Generation Facilities (end of December. 2018)”, Apr. 2019*IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

9

Reference

Nuclear energy‘s slow progress
Status of Nuclear Reactors Approved After Implementation of New Regulatory
Standards (on July 8, 2013) (8 in operation, 1 offline, 6 in review)
StatusCompany

Reactor

Adj. operation

Commercial operation

Suspension durationIn
operation

Kyushu E.P.

Sendai 1①August 2015
②December 2016
③June 3, 2018

①9/10/2015-10/6/2016②1/6/2017-1/29/2018③6/29/2018-

Regular checkups①10/6/2016-1/6/2017②1/29/2018-6/29/2018

In
operation

Kyushu E.P.

Sendai 2①October 2015
②February 2017
③Aug.31, 2018

①11/17/2015-12/16/2016②3/24/2017-4/23/2018③9/28/2018-

Regular checkups①12/16/2016-3/24/2017②4/23/2018～9/28/2018

In
operation

Kansai E.P.

Takahama 3①January 2016
②June 2017
③Nov.9, 2018

①2/26/2016-3/10/2016②7/4/2017-8/3/2018③12/7/2018～①District court order
3/10/2016-3/28/2017②8/3/2018～12/7/2018

In
operation

Kansai E.P.

Takahama 4①February 2016
②May 2017③Sep.3, 2018

(March 2016 ➍Suspension forcheckups)①6/16/2017-5/18/2018②9/28/2018-①District court order
3/10/2016-3/28/2017②5/18/2018～9/28/2018

In
operation

Shikoku
E.P.

Ikata 3

①August 2016
②Oct.30, 2018

①9/7/2016-10/3/2017②11/28/2018～

Regular checkups

OfflineKansai E.P.

Ohi 3

①March 2018(②June. 2019)①4/10/2018-4/11/2019(②July. 2019)10/3/2017- 11/28/2018

H.C. ordered the temporary
injunction (12/13/2017～

Notes

Takahama Units 3 and 4 were shut down due
to a district court temporary injunction orderfor suspension. After a high court cancelled
the temporary injunction order on March 28,
2017, they will restart after ➍ passing
checkups.

On Dec. 2017, Hiroshima High Court ordered thetemporary injunction against operation of Ikata 3,
under the regular statutory checkups within 13
months after commercial operation.

9/25/2018)

Sep. 25, 2018, High court allows restart of
Ikata 3 reactor.

Regular checkups

Resuming operation after regular checkups within 13
months after commercial operation①4/11/2019～（July 2019）

In operation

Kyushu E.P.

Genkai 3①March 2018

①5/16/2018-

In operation

Kansai E.P.

Ohi 4

①May 11, 2018

①6/5/2018-

In operation

Kyushu E.P.

Genkai 4①June 19, 2018

①7/19/2018-

In review

Kansai E.P.

Takahama 1➊➋Approved ➌Before application

Pursuing restart in or after August 2019

In review

Kansai E.P.

Takahama 2➊➋Approved ➌Before application

Pursuing restart in or after March 2020

In review

Kansai E.P.

Mihama 3➊➋Approved ➌ In review

Pursuing restart in or after March 2020

In review

TEPCOkashiwazaki-kariwa 6/7➊Approved ➋ In review ➌ In review

In review

JAPC

Tokai Daini➊➋Approved ➌ In review

IEEJ © Apr. 2019

（ As of Apr. 11, 2019 ）IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

10

２．Key points of the 5th Basic Energy Plan

(2) Outline of the 5th Basic Energy Plan : Chapter 1
Chapter 1: Structural Issues, Changes in Circumstances, and Policy Timeframe

Section 1: Structural issues faced by Japan
1. Vulnerability due to high dependency on overseas energy resources
2. Mid- to long-term changes in the energy demand structure ( population decline, etc. )3. Instability of resource prices ( increased energy demand in emerging countries, etc. )4. Increasing global greenhouse gas emissions

Section 2: Changes in energy environments (2030）
1. Start of inter-technology competition for decarbonization( renewable energy, fossil fuels, nuclear, etc. )2. Geopolitical risks increased by technology changes
3. Intensified competition between nations and firms

Section 3: Achievement of an optimal energy mix by 2030 and its relation
with the 2050 scenario(Omitted)
IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

11

２．Key points of the 5th Basic Energy Plan

(2) Outline of the 5th Basic Energy Plan : Chapter 2
Chapter 2: Basic Policies and Measures towards 2030
Section 1: Basic policies ⇒ Seeking to securely implement energy mix for 2030
Section 2: Policy measures towards 2030
1.

Promotion of securing of resources:⇒ Promotion of independent development of fossil fuel and mineral
resources and establishment of a robust industrial system
Independent development ratio (oil/natural gas): 27%(2016)→40%(2030)
Methane hydrate: Seeking commercialization between 2023 and 2027

2.

Realization of a thorough energy efficientsociety:⇒ Using artificial intelligence, internet of things, big data, etc.

3.

Efforts for the utilization of renewable energy
as the major power source:⇒ Initiatives to develop renewable energy into major power source

4.

Re-establishment of the nuclear energy policy:⇒ Sincere remorse, restoration of public trust, reconstruction of Fukushimacontinuous safety improvement, spent nuclear fuel measures

5.

Efficient and stable use of fossil fuel:⇒ Introducing regulatory measures while promoting voluntary initiatives

6.

Fundamental reinforcement of measures forrealizing a hydrogen society:⇒ Implementation of measures based on the Basic Hydrogen Strategy

…

…

10.

Development of energy industry policy:⇒Expanding markets for storage batteries, hydrogen, fuel cells and othertechnologies for which Japan has taken global leadership

Section 3: Promotion of technology development
・Energy technology development plan/roadmap

Section 4: Enhancement of communication with all levels of the society
・Expanding interactive communications

IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

12

２．Key points of the 5th Basic Energy Plan

(2) Outline of the 5th Basic Energy Plan : Chapter 3
Chapter 3: Efforts for Energy Transitions and Decarbonization towards 2050
Section 1: Ambitious multiple track scenario – Pursue every option(Note) Electricity system examples① Variable Renewable Energy (Solar PV, Wind)＋ electricity storage, hydrogen storage② Converting overseas resources into hydrogen or synthetic gas③ Existing carbon-free power sources (hydro, geothermal heat, nuclear energy)⇒ Nuclear: Pursuing safer, economical and flexible reactors④ Distributed systems integrated with digital technology
Section 2: Designing of The 2050 Scenario
・Energy security: Improving resources self-sufficiency rate
+ raising technology self-sufficiency rate, securing diversification

Section 3: Issues faced by each option and priorities in response thereto
・Nuclear: to restore social trust, developing backend technologies

Section 4: All-out efforts to realize the scenario
IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

Reference
Comparison of Long-Term Strategies– Ambitious Aims in Japan On Par With the US/Europe;
Emphasis on Implementation and Flexible

GermanyJapan

Reference for actions
over the next few years
from a path review

Possible path toreaching the goals

Direction for lowering
emissions

Initiative for energy
transition▲80% or more

▲75%

▲80~95%●Requires further●Assistance for seaexpansion of wind,based wind and otherphotovoltaic, and hydronew market entry
power（50~80% in renewables）●More flexibility
needed to integrate
renewable energy●Optimization ofvariable renewables
via sector coupling●Extend operation
periods and make nextgeneration nuclear power
investments(17~26%)●Planning to invest $25
billion in nuclear powerover the next 15 years●Assistance forinnovations to develop
next-generation nuclear
power●Raising nuclear
power to 50%(Energy Conversion
Act)

Thermal●Presents a broad
range (CCS: 0~25%)●Includes CCS（CCS: 0~10%）●End thermal power
without CCS by 2025

●CCS is vital to an
extreme zero emissions
scenario●No support for new
coal thermal plants

Thermalandtransport
Electrifica
tion;
Hydrogen CCUS●Electrification
advances（45~65%）●Electrification widely
needed to lower emissions●Promote heat pumpand EV usage●Possibility of hydrogen
having an important rolein areas where
electrification is difficult●Lead in CCUS
●CCS leeway in hightechnology
emission industries●Use hydrogen in●Possibility of usinghydrogen in heavy industry FCVs and industry andconsumer heat supply
and ships●Electrification isimportant in energy
savings●Electrification of
automotive and consumer
thermal uses (about 30%)

（ensuring flexibility）

Reduction
goal

Goals andpolicy direction

Zero emissions

VariablerenewableenergyStablerenewable
Energy,Nuclear(CCS,
hydrogen)

Energysavings
Overseas
contribution

Implementation
mechanism

CanadaAmbitious vision forachieving reduction
goals

Information for
discussion▲80% or more

▲80%

（not intended as policy
formulation)（vs. 2005）●Infrastructure andregulatory assistanceneeded (55~65% in
renewables)（not a policy blueprint）（vs. 2005）(5~50%)（40~72%）

UK※Quantitative values reflect
scenario ranges in the long-term
strategy and country goals

FranceConceptUS13（difficult to make longterm forecasts)（vs. 1990）（not an action plan)（vs. 1990）（not a master plan）（vs. 1990）（80% in renewables）●Utilize CCS in highemission industries(ambitious scenario)▲80%●Ultrahigh efficiency
renewable energy
development; storage battery
and hydrogen stored power
development●Stable renewable energy
development●Safe reactors and backend technology
development●Hydrogen and CCUS
contribute todecarbonization inheavy industries●Advanced HP
development, EV/PHV
development●Hydrogen recycling
system development
and FCV development●Lead development of a
distributed energy system（Compact decarbonization
power, vehicle storage
battery usage, AI and IoT
usage, automated driving,
demand control, etc.)●Improve efficiency of ●Improve efficiency
the entire energy system of the entire energy(▲24~30%; vs. 2005)
system●Lift energy savingsof all households to acertain level●Significant energy
savings required in all
areas●Robust decoupling of
economic growth andenergy consumption●Contributing via
expansion of US
product markets●Promotinginternational
contributions (0~15%)●Leading the worldin environmental
investment●Contributions by
French companies
through overseas
development assistance●Maintaining andstrengthening
developing country
investments●Low-carbon
promotion investments+ decarbonization
developments

Periodic review

Periodic review

Carbon budget

Carbon budget

Scientific verificationand dialogue with the
public sector

Decarbonization systemcosts and risk assessment＋
Scientific review（▲5~35%; vs. 2014)（▲50%; vs. 1990)（▲50%; vs. 2008)(Source) METI, ANRE “Structure of the 5th basic energy plan (draft), etc.” Natural Resources and Fuel Committee (27th Meeting), Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy, Document 1, p.3 (May 16, 2018)

IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

14

Reference

Need for new and additional nuclear plants: Will the target nuclear share be maintained at 20-22% ?
❖ Extension of lifetime or construction of new reactors is required
2030

Installed capacity, 10MW
5,500

Lifetime: 40 years

28.6%
in 20105,000

Lifetime: 60 years

20-22%
in 2030

4,500
4,000
3,500

*Capacity utilization rate assumed at 70%(Around 35 reactors with capacity at 1 million
kW per reactor) ～90％ (Around 30 reactors)

3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500

IEEJ © Apr. 2019

2070

2068

2066

2064

2062

2060

2058

2056

2054

2052

2050

2048

2046

2044

2042

2040

2038

2036

2034

2032

2030

2028

2026

2024

2022

2020

2018

2016

2014

2012

2010

0

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

15

Reference

Technology Options ( hydrogen ) Production technology has been almost established.
 Three options exist for transportation (energy carriers): under demonstration
 The economically rational realization of CCS is the initial key to hydrogen orammonia production from fossil fuels: Still in the demonstration stage.
(Note) Zero carbon hydrogen can be produced from RE as well
Overseas

In JapanInternationaltransport

Loading site
Renewables

LH2

Liquef ac tion

Waterelectrolysis

H2

Unloading site
Gas if ic ation

MCH
Addition

Steam reforming,
gasification

Hydrogen
distribution inJapan

H ydr og enat i on

NH3
Syn th e s i s

Fossil fuels

Renewables
H2
Waterelectrolysis

H ydr oc r ac ki ng

CO2
CCS, EOR

Ammonia distribution
in JapanNote: LH2 stands for liquefied hydrogen and MCH stands for methylcyclohexane.
IEEJ © Apr. 2019

Industry
sector, etc.

HydrogenstationFCVHydrogenpower
generation
Ammonia
power
generation

Source: IEEJIEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

16

Reference

Hydrogen Cost Reduction
 Although cost estimates differ depending on energy carrier and technologicaladvancement assumptions, raw material and equipment costs must be
substantially reduced.
(Maximum expansion case)
CCS cost (in Japan)
Domestic distribution
Rehydrogenation/refining
Unloading site
Maritime transportation
Loading site
Synthesizing carriers
Raw hydrogen

Hydrogen cost (yen/Nm3)

Hydrogen cost (yen/Nm3)(Research and development case)

Domestic distribution
CCS cost (in Japan)
Rehydrogenation/refining
Unloading site
Maritime transportation
Loading site
Synthesizing carriers
Raw hydrogen

Source: Energy carrier system survey and research – assessment of energy carrier systems’ economic efficiency and analysis of their characteristics under a leading hydrogen use researchand development project, by the Institute of Applied Energy under contract from the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization

Saudi Arabia
Iran
Iraq
RussiaIndonesia
U.S. non-shale
NorwayU.S. shale
CanadaVenezuela
Nigeria
Source: Rystad Energy, Ucube (as of Apr. 2016)
BrazilThe Wall Street Journal, Published April 15, 2016
U.K.

Oil and Gas
Production
Costs

http://graphics.wsj.com/oil-barrel-breakdown/
IEEJ © Apr. 2019

0

10

20

30

40

50

＄/bbl

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

17

３．Possible Cooperation in North East Asia
(1) Energy Security
1) High Dependence on Middle East-> Help ME be Stabilized2) “Belt and Road” and “ Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy”-> Two cooperation need to be enhanced in a complementary manner-> North East Asia Power Grid

(2) Economic Efficiency ( Affordability )1) Avoiding “Asian Premium” of LNG-> Elimination of Destination Clause and Establishing Asian LNG
market/price index
2) Coordinated upstream activity of oil and gas3) Learning adequacy of market reform
IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

３．Possible Cooperation in North East Asia
(3) Environment1) Prevention of Pollution-> Desulfurization, Denitrification
2) Realizing Paris Agreement-> Transfer of Traditional Eco-friendly Technology
ex. Energy Efficiency , Renewable energy and nuclear-> Development of new technology
ex. USC , Hydrogen , carbon recycling(4) Safety
1) Sharing objective facts-> Death print of Energy2) Harmonization of nuclear safety regulation
IEEJ © Apr. 201918

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

Conclusion

19

1. The current energy mix for 2030 was determined in 2015,
based on the 4th Basic Energy Plan.
It would take some more time to achieve this energy mix becauseof slow progress of reoperation of nuclear reactors and high costof renewable energy.
2. The 5th Basic Energy Plan was determined in 2018 andthe message are;1) the current energy mix toward 2030 need to be maintained.
2) we should have multiple scenario of energy mix toward 2050
such as① Variable Renewable Energy ( Solar PV, Wind ) ＋ electricity storage, hydrogen storage② Converting overseas resources into hydrogen or synthetic gas③ Existing carbon-free power sources ( hydro, geothermal heat, nuclear energy )⇒ Nuclear: Pursuing safer, economical and flexible reactors④ Distributed systems integrated with digital technology

3. Energy Cooperation in North East Asia need to be put into practice.
IEEJ © Apr. 2019

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

20

Reference

The Deathprint of Energy
Energy Source
Coal – global average
Coal – China
Coal – U.S.
OilNatural Gas
Biofuel/Biomass
Solar
Wind
Hydro – global average
Hydro – U.S.
Nuclear – global average
Nuclear – U.S.

Mortality Rate

(deaths/trillion kWh)

100,000
170,000
10,00036,0004,000
24,000
440
150
1,400
5
90
0.1
Source: J. conca, Forbes 2016/9/30

IEEJ © Apr. 2019 The table lists estimates ofthe mortality rate for eachenergy source as deaths
per trillion kWhs generated
over the last 40 years.
 The numbers are a
combination of direct
deaths and epidemiologicalestimates and are anamalgam of many sources(note) Japan used about 1 trillion
kWh in 2014, 32% from coal
U.S. used about 4 trillion
kWh in 2015, 33% from coal

IEEJ：April 2019 © IEEJ2019

21

We provide
part of our cutting-edge
research results on energy
and the environment on

our website freeof charge.
On the 29th January 2019, the Think Tanks and Civil
Societies Program at the University of Pennsylvania(U.S.) released its “2018 Global Go To Think Tank
Index Report”, the most comprehensive ranking of
the world’s top think tanks.
In the ranking for 2018, the Institute of Energy Economics,
Japan ( IEEJ )is ranked 2nd in the worldin the category of Energy andResource Policy Think Tanks.
Past
Ranking

3rd → 1st → 3rd → 2nd(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017/18)“2018 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report” (p.123)
http://repository.upenn.edu/think_tanks/
IEEJ © Apr. 2019

Contact :report@tky.ieej.or.jp